March 01, 2015, 08:23:55 PM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - mrmarks

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 11
Canon General / Re: Reuters Best Photos of 2012
« on: December 04, 2012, 09:10:13 PM »
Quite a testament to the Canon lineup and system.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Pro's who use 5D MkII
« on: December 04, 2012, 09:06:03 AM »
The_Limper posted a link to Reuters pictures of the year, not only almost all are made with Canons, but you'll see a lot are made with 5D2s or 5D3s.

Quite a testament to the Canon lineup.

Lenses / Re: how to test a new lens, particularly the 24-70L II
« on: November 29, 2012, 08:40:34 PM »
Sure, there's always some statistical distribution in any manufacturing (within SPC and specification limits) but as said in the review: "But I think you’d agree in real photographs it will probably be impossible to see the difference"

Looks like extensive damage! Might as well get a good used one.

Lenses / Re: Canon are obsessed with an IS version of the 24-70
« on: November 29, 2012, 08:21:02 PM »
Full of typos! 600RT-RT? Sheesh

Lenses / Re: how to test a new lens, particularly the 24-70L II
« on: November 29, 2012, 08:19:27 PM »
Since there are reports of large variance in copy sharpness with the 24-70L ii,

Where did you get this from? I would say in most cases, it is the user using some inaacurate method to assess and drawing some inaccurate conclusions. I think Canon's QC is pretty tight, and the 24-70L2 has a much better design than its predecessor to prevent element decentering. There was an article somewhere showing a teardown of the lens and the design was shown to be really robust. I got mine off the shelf randomly and no issues so far. Pretty pleased.

Lenses / Re: Filters for 24-70 II
« on: November 29, 2012, 08:10:30 PM »
I would recommend the B+W clear XS-pro. There is no need to use a UV filter as the sensor already has a UV coating. As for the ND filter, it depends on what you application is. For example, if you're using it for landscape, I would recommend a filter holder system like Lee because if you need grad ND filters, you can adjust the filter transition line precisely. If you're using it to cut down light for wide apertures, you could use a screw-in filter or a filter holder. The filter holder system is kinda versatile.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D MARK III with 50 mm f/1.2 performence
« on: November 28, 2012, 10:58:12 PM »
Alex, lovely shots! BTW, how do you do the distortion correction in post? Thanks

Lenses / Re: 24-70 or 70-200??
« on: November 21, 2012, 10:15:25 AM »
I guess you're talking about the 24-70F2.8L2 and the 70-200ISF2.8L2. Both are really excellent lenses with full frame and are complementary. Since your 50L1.2 covers the middle of the 24-70 focal range, you should get the 70-200. It is the best compromise. Of course if you have the money, you should get both and still keep the 50L2 for very low light or shallow dof work.

Animal Kingdom / Re: MY dog
« on: November 20, 2012, 06:41:25 PM »
My dog as a puppy......chews anything in his path

_MG_0175 by marksmike, on Flickr

Lenses / Re: Canon Announces New Lens Caps!
« on: November 07, 2012, 12:25:11 AM »
It will be nice if Canon can also come out with new hoods (with textured surface) that are more scratch resistant, such as that for the 70-200L2 and 24-70L2, for all lenses.

Lenses / Re: Canon Announces New Lens Caps!
« on: November 06, 2012, 06:43:25 PM »
Canon should come up with an old-for-new lens cap exchange program, since we have already paid a premium for all their lenses!

Lenses / Re: Opinion: EF 24-70 f/4L IS & EF 35 f/2 IS
« on: November 05, 2012, 10:05:45 AM »
The IS in these two lenses will be useful for videos

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L IS [CR1]
« on: October 30, 2012, 07:41:22 AM »

Problem is, I don't think the 24-70 (without IS) was designed with you in mind.  I would guess that the main use case Canon considered was reportage - PJs and wedding shooters being the two biggest camps. - Both of those groups need to keep their shutter speeds up to reduce motion blur - in the region of 1/80s to 1/125s at least. - For that reason, IS on a 24-70 is not important for that use case, while it is important for a 70-200mm lens used in the same circumstances.

You are just part of an unlucky minority.

Canon possibly didn't consider the video crowd with bringing the 24-70 f/2.8 II to market.  On the other hand, if Canon had included IS, all the PJs and wedding shooters would have complained about the unnecessary cost of unneeded IS with the lens.

It looks like Canon can't win - they are bound to make somebody unhappy, no matter what they do!

Agreed, and IS would also add unnecessary weight and degrade the IQ

There is a lack of in-between min shutter speeds to select from, in the auto ISO mode. For instance, there's no 1/160th. I hope Canon will fill up those gaps in the min shutter speed selection.

But it will be better if the min shutter speed can be set automatically as a multiple of the lens focal length.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 11